most people leave prison do a little bit of an analysis and that they already if we just cut by two weeks or three weeks and four weeks or the kinds of sentences people are serving. >> good evening i am the event manager here it is my pleasure to welcome you to tonight's live stream with investigated the journalist and conversation with a radio host. as we get underway alike to look at the untraditional territory with those natural resources of the ancestral homeland. thank you for tuning in to

present this event virtually. and then to sustain ideas. and then thank you for appearing tonight to help make that happen. this is not have close captioning but watch the stream on youtube and the video will be available for re- watching after the podcast. and with those content we encourage you with those seattle arts and lectures and then to be put under significant strain due to

event cancellations we hope you'll consider extending your generosity to help support us during this difficult time by clicking the donate button or you can always become a member. booksellers that have also been hit that can use your support as well if you're interested in supporting local independent bookstores by purchasing a copy of tonight's book, we are partnering with third-place books you can purchase them through the bottom one - - the button at the bottom of the page. and those that submitted to ask the question field. and you can also vote we can't

guarantee we will get through all the questions. please keep the precise and in the form of a question. through your support and our sponsors this is made possible we are spread of other real network foundation. finally town all is another organization and we can't thank all members watching tonight. the executive editor of new york.com into the christian science monitor awarded a pulitzer prize for those to help expose the massacre during the war in bosnia. and with the teams of times reporter for afghanistan and pakistan. and in the middle east.

also a rope and a prayer a story about a kidnapping with his wife and the endgame, betrayal. as a podcast or, broadcaster, or, broadcaster, writer and teacher and with university of washington. the interviews with award-winning authors and scientists and artists are noted for their intelligence and sensitivity. and that is democratized by paying access and and is also the host of the series at length. and the truth of the deep state is the subject of the talk please join me to welcome

our gas. >> thank you. very nice. it is good to see you. and to say that steve share with rocks. >> that is my friend and neighbor and former journalist. we walk our dogs together when we can. but not right now. >> take any support you can get anywhere. >> where you right now? >> i am at my parents in law's house in kennebunkport maine normally a live in new york city my wife has asthma so we left the city as the covid

outbreak was spreading. so we are here in maine and safe and well and my friends in new york who are still there although it does look like it is doing better and seattle has set a good example for the country to flatten the curve. >> at least you got to be in a place you are more comfortable in all the ways that you need to be. >> we are lucky. >> it's funny about seattle. this is what i was thinking and we can start with this. the protesters came to olympia to complain about the infringements on their personal freedoms because of the restrictions from social distancing. more than one of the signs as

they gathered up and holding together much closer than 6 feet, was no more from the deep state. how do you suppose in their thinking the response to covid-19 is a symbol but an action by the deep state? >> so those conservatives people use it in different ways. so the conservatives and i am guessing these protesters view it as the administrative state. and an ever-growing federal or state governments that is encroaching on america's lives like with their right to vaccines or gun-control and education curriculum and they

feel that the warnings are over exaggerated and it's an example of washington dictating to average americans how they should live their lives. >> let's define it and all definitions of the deep state. wended that term first become prevalent? >> i wrote the book to clear the definition of a deep state. but i don't like the term it is pejorative but it started off as a term political science is used to talk about the military and the country of turkey and the dynamic we

and sometimes was applied to egypt and the earliest example was a book in 2007 with the host professor and his view of the deep state and with another view of the impressive government but they talk about the military-industrial complex and those defense contractors pushing the country into the endless war so in 2007 it was more along those lines with the defense contractors suspicious how 9/11 came about but also very suspicious of austrian their power so and told 2007 and

that was the example of the left and the right coming together with the suspicion of the federal government but before the 2016 the term deep state wasn't widely in use with average americans. >> did you talk to many conservative deep stators that recognize the concern of the military industrial complex? >> there is unity the one person that comes to mind is senator rand paul who is republican and very nervous about the us to be drug in two wars overseas with the national security agency and his kindred spirit is ron wyden of oregon who was a liberal also very concerned if

there is eavesdropping in too much spine going on in the country so there is growing distrust of the federal government there was a poll that set me off to write the book that 70 percent of americans think there is a group of unelected officials that make government policy in washington. >> i always thinking about leading up to the campaig campaign, donald trump was asked for his support with russia given all the negative things it has done around the world and trump's response is you think were so great? we are not so great or innocent. we have done a lot of things. i thought that was an interesting response and i wonder if you think that resonated with those who came to support donald trump? >> i think it did.

people mock him but he is extremely good at messaging and consistently presenting that narrative and in terms of what the us has done around the world, he is right. i start my book and 1977 a huge investigation in the church committee and they investigated on the cold war or to expose assassinations the caa was spying on john lennon when he was protesting against the vietnam war and they were also famous for wiretapping and harassing mlk j edgar hoover had a list of 26000 americans that would be rounded up in case of emergency any way it was an

amazing number of scandals but there was a whole system that was created in the late seventies and president ford said after watergate to control the fbi and the cia and then talking to people current and former that claim they operated differently since all these protections and oversight mechanisms were in place. >> i guess until of the grave and watergate. [laughter] >> you got me. but that is true. >> did you interview rand paul? >> i did not. i tried but he declined. >> i just wonder what he would say. in some ways his politics

could look back on the seventies reforms and say these are concerns that i mentioned i grew up in chicago where black panthers were killed through very underhanded means. so do we come around? so is there a coming together with a concern of the deep state? >> not amount mainstream republicans those systems were put in with the federal court and that which we will talk about four eavesdropping and with the intelligence oversight committee and ron

wyden and the idea is to have eavesdropping you had to have a warrant and there was a band on assassinations to carry out the assassination another country has to be written and then the findings have to go to the leading members of congress of both parties. cia directors i'm sorry fbi directors are supposed to not serve any longer than ten years to prevent j edgar hoover for emerging and this is much more extensive than what other countries have for those in the legislative bodies by england or germany or france that can subpoena the intelligence service. all of that said there is a bunch of people out there who

say they are out of control just to go to 9/11, with the detention and torture practices that were approved with the justice department wrote a famous legal opinion that those officers that were involved said they were following the orders they were lawful by a duly elected president that was the difference the cia and fbi doing things on their own. but people don't believe it and in terms of assassination, brock obama carried out a record number of drone strikes and there is even one citizen that was killed and yemen with no public presentation of evidence and a us citizen was

killed by the us government. >> there is pretty remarkable numbers on that. we will come back to that but let me circle back. these committee reforms did they curtail presidential power or shift power from the executive to congress? >> they did and the broader question is how do you control the cia and fbi to keep them from carrying out abuses how do you have presidents from doing that? there is a school of thought with the current us attorney general that to agree to all of these changes that they worked in the ford white house and antonin scolari a one - - antonin scalia said the

creative one - - creation of oversight committees also the inspectors general they had come to terms with the spending of emergency funds for coronavirus those were independent, apolitical positions created by congress and to investigate spending and abuse and corruption in the executive branch and there was a school of thought that essentially the presidency was being weekend too much. too much oversight by congress and then there was a speech about this from the attorney general that said too much activism from judges he is an opponent of abortion rights he saw that as the courts going too far but with the president's power, he complained just recently under president trump the immigration orders stopped by federal judges that stopped

what trump was trying to carry out. he just said that his overreach. we need a strong presidency to protect the country in moments of disaster and bar argues more than the judicial branch performs best when the country is under threat and he favors a strong presidency that cannot be encumbered or slow down. >> to questions. is there any evidence in your reporting that this is a little bit that a strong president has done a better job than the legislature here in congress during times of

crisis? >> i would argue post 9/11 , the president needed to detain the terrorist and put them in guantánamo bay. the bush administration, they ran a warrantless wiretapping program. they felt that most supported that after 9/11 but if you fast-forward to today there is a belief among other conservatives of a strong executive with donald trump who welcomes that power and says we can get into the coronavirus response but to go back and forth i am the ultimate authority it is up to

the states to decide. but these are central questions about how should our democracy function? should they be equally powerful or do we need a strong presidency? >> i thought that the founders wrote the constitution in such a way they were three coequal branches of government. what what attorney general bar say to that quick. >> article two of the constitution describes the execute the laws and running the government is the chief executive branch that there are conservative scholars that agree with that. and to be fair, congress has struggled. is so divided politically i

can't think of that legislative package that has emerged through the last few presidencies than congress leading the way. there is a sense since 9/11 they redeem the power that they have lost. >> when donald trump says i am the president and i can do whatever i want because i am a president, and they point to article two, there's nothing else in the constitution that i can point to that says wait a minute i thought there was some oversight? >> the main mechanism is the election. that is the primary thing. that the executive is held accountable in regular elections and impeachment those of the two mechanisms. >> so i can hope they will always then respect the outcome of any election or the outcome of any impeachment. if they say their power is all

encompassing, they can also say this impeachment proceeding is a fraud and we won't comply because we don't have to because we are the executives. >> that is part of the argument and that's what happened with the recent impeachment proceeding but to be fair there was a. recently where trump was pushing the attorney general to go easy on roger stone's sentencing which was very unusual interview he said the presidents tweets and demands the sentence that roger stone the less is making it impossible for bill bar to do his job. there is a red line. one of the things that came out of watergate is that the attorney general under nixo nixon, john much mitchell was punishing the presidents enemies so they are supposed

to apply the law equally. so if the president says let's go crackdown on pharmaceutical companies that is my priority for law enforcement then the attorney general should do it. i want to emphasize that presidents are elected. they have democratic mandates from the american people to carry out their policies and government servants should carry those out unless they are illegal and improper. but the president says to the attorney general, i don't like that. and that pharmaceutical companies ceo because they gave me a large campaign donation and that is improper and we did signal that activity is improper. but it is all extraordinary what is happening today.

>> what about his own approaches to investigating ukraine or biden or the fbi with the decision to investigate trump was legal? is that political or can they be seen as a duly responsible efforts of the attorney general? >> this is where i think there is more problems. just today republican controlled senate ruled the cia assessment that russia intervened in the election to help donald trump was correct. based on the evidence the intelligence community collected and all republican senators saw, they agreed , this wasn't just a fake story to discredit donald trump or a plot that russia helped trump.

they in fact did help trump and right now you mentioned the attorney general had us attorney carrying out of probe of cia analyst of the assessment was correct and there's a separate part of the investigation of what they did but it was a big boost for these intelligence analyst to find it extraordinary they are investigated by a us prosecutor for the assessment of what russia did. one of the most puzzling things is this pattern to investigate the investigators. anyone that comes out with that assessment that the president doesn't like, like a criminal investigation, that has a chilling effect on the intelligence committee and

they are testifying less and less because senators will push them it's the same thing to contradict president trump or attack them and said the assessment is north korea would not give out the nuclear weapons but trump mocked him and then the new is much more political with those assessments that align with the presidents messaging. >> it is difficult because the line between political as we are supposed to see them is difficult so you mentioned the

bbc comedy yes minister about the permanent secretaries of departments to maneuver around the political appointees in the prime minister's in the uk. they were the power in that tv show. how much truth to do you ascribe to the notion and all of these appointments today? >> no question 3 million americans the uniform it military of the 2 million americans a spend years if not decades with the federal government from park service

and with social security and cia and fbi they have biases every office one - - president complains about the bureaucracy they are elected and they have a mandate and they feel sometimes certain parts of the government but when ronald reagan came in he said that it would not carry out the agenda to carry out communism and felt that the pentagon for how many us troops obama should sent to afghanistan but no president has taken civil servants careers because that is what is different about the trump er trump era. . . . .

congressional committees that would love to catch government service during that period they have subpoenas they can send fbi agents they can wiretap governors service if they want, there are laws, federal civil service and engaging in activities. every federal civil servant takes an oath of office. i spoke to many of them and they admitted some of them they have colleagues who aren't that great. but, joan dempsey was one of the characters in the book who had a career, one a few women in the community and she rose

to the number three position in the cia. one of the top intelligent officials of her generation. she saw most of her colleagues as a do-gooders, very cautious and rule abiding. people who like to work for government. that is her view. again many people are very cynical about government workers. >> just setting trumps rhetoric aside, is there any evidence the last four years have seen more activity by these supposedly neutral parties to undermine the policies of the trump administration? >> guest: i would say no in most parts of the government. think many people have left. a lot of departures at epa, michael lewis wrote a book about this. i think the biggest question, focuses on the fbi and the

trump/russa investigation. james and baker, it's not james baker of the head of state it was general counsel the fbi. he worked with jim comey throughout the summer of 2016 and as the fbi was carrying out the trump russia investigation. that's the big question was the fbi undermining trump by investigating his campaign? i kind of agree with the findings, the inspector general's independent position put together. the inspector general for the government department put together a 5000 word about this, interviewed comey, dozens of intelligent agents under oath, horwitz found there was legal justification for the launching of the fbi, trump russia investigation is not based on the dossier which was full of untruths. we can talk about the dossier separately.

as lots during the campaign it was justified. after 911, the fbi, with lots of support from democrats and republicans, lowered the amount of evidence you needed to carry out an investigation. that was to stop terrorism so the fbi could quickly investigate anybody they wanted. there is not a tremendous amount of investigation but legalized authorizing opening. the biggest thing the fbi could've done to under my donald trump in the 2016 summer, was to leak the facts they were investigating trump and russia. that would've sabotaged his campaign. they did not do that. we ask, i ask questions to the justice department officials about the dossier, with carter page meeting with russian officials? they refused to comment it would not give me anything. one specific low antidote, i interviewed john brennan this

was six weeks before the election we were sitting in the director's office inside the cia headquarters look up the windows as a canopy of green trees outside, i asked him, mr. brannon can you tell me are these videotapes that russia has it or compromising, then republican candidate trump. he paused, seem surprised, and said i am not going to comment on this one way or another prime not confirming it, not denying, look, i just want to urge you you are going to hear a lot of crazy things about donald trump of the last six weeks of the election. going to hear a lot of crazy things about hillary clinton in the last six weeks and he urged me not to write about these allegations. he said only write things you can really prove definitively and you know are factually correct. again, one of the current

conspiracy theories was john brennan was running i given the dossier to everyone, it was just a last plug. we all had the dossier, we got it from glenn simpson, the head of gps fusion. every major news organization had the dossier throughout the 2016 election. none of us could prove it, we did not print a word of it. i think there is one story that ran the last days of the election that may be mentioned it. again, if the press was out to get donald trump during the 2016 we would've been writing about the dossier and none of us did. >> guest: note we're writing that hillary's e-mails and james comey's decisions. >> during the campaign at the fbi heard anybody it was james comey opening before the election. i talked at length to jim becker, the general counsel,

he said that they had to do that they had to be honest with congress, honest with the country. again, that's another idea, the fbi trying to sabotage trump being questionable. there are questions about what happens after the election. >> that's also murky right? >> yes. >> after the election? >> i mention carter page earlier, what was found in the inspector general's report was there were four warrants to this surveillance, one created in the 70s, the first two warrants were proper, they were legally sufficient to surveilled carter page. but the last two weren't. that is wrong. carter page should not of been surveilled for as long as he was surveilled. there is a really troubling thing or an fbi lawyer change in e-mail. it was an e-mail -- the reason they were suspicious of carter

page he had left the trump campaign, he was no longer an advisor when he was surveilled. he was meeting with all these government officials. there is an e-mail that said page was talking to the cia as he was meeting with these russian officials. he was cooperating with the cia. the low-level fbi change the meaning of that e-mail to say page was not cooperating with the cia. i heard from someone close to that comment fbi lawyer said it was a mistake and it was some nefarious thing. he misunderstood what pages status was with the cia. that lawyer is under investigation and should be. those are improper warrants, there's a new report by the inspector general that is found systematic sloppiness in the application the fbi put to the surveillance courts. and then the surveillance

court itself is like a rubberstamp. i would save all the institutions created to control the fbi, the fisa court, is the least effective comments to secretive. the public should know more this should be rejecting many more applications to surveilled people. it simply wasn't -- trump tower was never surveilled it wasn't only donald trump. this was a real problem for many americans, many muslim americans after 911 were not properly surveilled. it's just the president exaggerating things that happened and things that went wrong. that is not a coup. he should not have been surveilled that long, carter page, but that is not a coup. >> why is the fisa court not doing a better job at balancing its role? >> i don't know i called those judges to do better.

it's literally government lawyers presenting evidence the fbi put together on why the need to surveilled. they are primarily surveying foreigners been the process to pick up americans. they will see why these americans hang out these russian diplomats that are believed to be intelligence operatives. or chinese diplomats. that system needs to improve. having these one-sided presentations from the justice department fbi, just not working. is there a reform somebody might have in mind? rand paul? somebody? >> bill barr has said there needs to be a higher level of evidence needed before an investigation of a political campaign can be carried out. i fully support that, be a great reform. again, under the standards of

evidence that existed in 2016, it was a legally open investigation. there's problems with just the exaggeration that's gone on to be frank, by the president. he calls the fbi agents who investigated him, several of his aides, lie to the fbi and were prosecuted for it. he called the fbi agents who did that a human scum. that's a gross exaggeration. can talk more about his term deep state to discredit institutions and people. >> will have about that? for all our concern, it is just trump's rhetoric. it's how he operates and how he gets his voters to stay in touch with him. is the deep state he talks about, a lie?

or has trump supporters say is just his way of talking and he's just trying to make a larger metaphorical point. >> and think that coronavirus us how dangerous this is. we sort of have to have a basic agreement on facts. how dangerous is the coronavirus? what is the infection right? what's the mortality rate? a 6 feet enough not enough? we have to rely on some kind of government experts, scientific experts, medical experts. if we as a society and democracy are going to effectively respond to these kind of challenges. we are in such a fierce political era were winner takes all.

i have relatives who are big supporters of the president and they feel he's just savaged by the news media and the democrats. i just feel this cycle of disdain, division, kind of conspiracy theory. even one that donald trump is a secret russian agent. robert mueller did not find collusion. think it's important we accept the mueller report. and not say trump colluded with russia to win the election. that is a very thorough investigation and collusion was not founded, let's move on from that. it's a very dangerous cycle of conspiracy theories we don't do ground facts and you sought in terms of the demonstration just recently in washington. >> two last questions for me and then we will open it up to get what you folks are thinking. one of them, is a little on

ukraine. and what we learned from that. if i am not mistaken, isn't bill barr even now investigating some of the folks who push for the ukraine impeachment proceedings? that not that it wasn't the impeachment proceedings that push for an investigation into the ukraine events? >> he has talked about a pretties much more aggressive -- is much more focus on the trump/rush investigation that was launched. he called it a travesty or one of the largest travesties in u.s. history. so look, maybe john durham, this federal prosecutors going to find astonishing criminal conspiracy that horwich and the inspector general and dozens of interviews and thousands of pages of documents did not find.

there is a pattern with the president of using a conspiracy theory to discredit his enemies. he's a very effective communicator and keeping what he is doing secret. you mention the impeachment, what i worry about is the president, thanks he is surrounded by enemies all these congressional people what i know is going on he's having a parallel government with the aids in the white house that he will not allow them to testify before congress you have rudy giuliani carrying out a private foreign policy on behalf of the president. ironically and it's one of the concluding thoughts about under the guise of stopping a coup that does not exist, trump is creating a shadow government of his own filled with loyalists, this no transparency, no proceedings, they don't know what's going

on inside the trump white house. so trump is creating a deep state of his own. >> didn't i read, i read it in the "new york times", about presidential findings that may exist, i believe the times was vague on how much they saw. but may exist, essentially gives the president the power that the president has given himself the power to do whatever he deems necessary for the public good or his own system his own position. >> executive orders? >> those findings are different. so executive orders i guess we have not seen them they are secret executive orders i guess. so yes and not getting outside of my depth here, i would think at some point they would have to be made public.

i don't know. i do know again it's reform of the 70s, but for covid action, that the written findings. they go to both findings the chair and ranking member of the intelligence committee they go to the speaker of the house, and the minority leader in both the house and the senate democrats would now if they were actually written findings about covid action. i would think executive orders would have to be made public. a lot of unprecedented stuff is happening. there's never been in impeachment with the president successfully said i reject your subpoenas. you cannot speak to mick mulvaney, though the white house she says staff you cannot look at any e-mails or documents related to ukraine.

this theory that bill barrs, the ultimate power in the election or impeachment, so to have a president say i reject your impeachment, this is shifting the balance of power we were talking about earlier. it's an extraordinary moment in american history how it's a question asking the book book, how powerful should a president be? >> with some difficulty folks should be up and running again, go ahead wherever you left off i think it was the question. >> let's take questions and talk about the press anytime. there are bad reporters like any profession let's go to questions. [laughter] what are your thoughts on eric prince and his relationship with betsy devos. is that in your purview? so there early proposals to

use private security guards to secure afghanistan. there were career officials and the cia and military said this is a terrible idea given some of the blackwater guards in iraq had killed civilians. one of the main characters in the book is an fbi agent who investigates the blackwater shooting in iraq is amos tom o'connor he's an amazing guy who spends the decades of his life he says and best get a evil and all forms he investigates al qaeda, white supremacist, blackwater, that proposal was blocked eventually and stopped. is that the deep state? or are these people have spent a lot of time in afghanistan, diplomats, intelligence officers, military stopping a bad proposal? from my time in afghanistan i would say that's not a good

idea. blackwater was despite throughout the islamic world because of what happened in baghdad. >> what about the deep state being the powerful lobbies in which the industrial military complex is a part and wall street? what is the evidence for that? >> i think there are very large defense contractors that have sway. one of the things about trump and i spoke to one aide who is now a very senior official in the administration, trump personally as opposed to getting the u.s. involved in anymore wars. depends on the perspective of the person, i was a both obama and trump resisted pressures, and syria obama wouldn't go in and he was criticized for that. obama pulled u.s. troops out of iraq, he had the surgeon afghanistan, but obama ended that surge. trump is an isolationist. he has resisted pressures if

there are firm corporate or defense contractors pretty spending a ton of money on the military, but is not engaging us in wars. again, this is my shtick as a journalist, the neat kind of theories don't always work out. i.e., donald trump is in the pocket of corporate american big firms. but he is not gotten us into a large war overseas since he's became president. so with the military-industrial complex people talk about is the money being spent not necessarily about. [inaudible] >> correct at least young americans aren't dying. anyway, point taken. [so we live in a state where there's a big military contractor that lobbies incessantly for its contracts and gets put champ pushback

from other places and companies sometimes. >> there very powerful. >> barack obama, donald trump, post- bush presidents and bush, gw, through dick cheney, rumsfeld and that idea became very powerful had many, many powerful tools. was a barack obama continuing to expand that power, using at the same level are given what i said about the drone strikes, was seeing ways to reduce the power of the presidency? so heat was much more focused, obama, obeying the law. think as i mentioned earlier will just jump right into this example.

what snowed in revealed, every program he talked about had been approved with the fisa corporate a lot of it was secret they didn't understand the extent of it but obama was very careful about following these guidelines have been set up in the 70s. the problem was he realized he did not want to get u.s. troops forever and iraq and afghanistan so he embraced drone strikes because he was very vulnerable politically if there was another tack on the united states. and then he felt deadlocked in terms of congress when he was president the republicans were seen as an out-of-control obstructionist carrying out too many investigations of obama. so republicans, there is a feeling obama was using more and more executive orders

secure at his policies of a didn't have the votes to carry them out with congress. so each president faced with this kind of deadlock as we get more and more divided are more and more partisan, they are using executive orders they use covid actions overseas to try to get things done. but obama did -- mikey stopped to waterboarding, he stopped torture he tried to stop others he was a more lawful presidency but just as powerful so has donald trump expanded or continued at the level of gw and obama? >> at that much more expansive interpretation of executive power. there's never been this refusal to flat out, all kinds of investigations into what his administration is doing and stonewalling congress at some much more sweeping thing,

to the public again i have ultimate authority i will decide in the states reopen. george w. bush never said that. using funds that were appropriated by congress for the pentagon, shifting the use of money that the legislative branch, the power of the purse, taking that money and using it to build a wall along the border of mexico, which congress did not want that money to be used for, that was a democratic vote of congress. so democrats with a small dn have a president saying nope i'm in a take that money and spend it how it went. no president has done that, no modern president, no president since nixon. >> didn't nixon spend money that wasn't authorized? so slush funds and money to burglarize the watergate stuff. so it's a sweeping, firing the

inspector general that's going to overlook the economic support funds in the wake of coronavirus. and appointing to replace him a white house lawyer who is seen as a real loyalist versus an independent figure. again, this is all getting rid of these powers that were created in the 70s to restrict presidents. it is a cumbersome system, all of these branches and it's hard to get stuff done in washington. it was designed that way. we have seen when you concentrate power, when there is not transparency, it can lead to abuses and corruption. so around the world. we americans pride ourselves on having a democracy that did not fall victim to strongmen, but apparently, we don't have as much control over that as we thought. the bill bars of the world said no you don't we have election.

>> there's also the argument that it's paralysis into messy. you need presidents -- again if you just go back to the obama administration there's a sense that mitch mcconnell was blocking everything. thousand abusive congressional power. that scene is good and democrats think it's good that nancy pelosi and schumer are fighting back. this is an enormous important moment in american history. setting precedents that will exist for future presidents whether they are republicans or democrats. >> what happened to the quiet resistance group that had the ad in the "new york times"? would you say their other people to push against trump's craziness to put it mildly? >> i don't know who anonymous is, i worked for the "new york times" or 15 years, i think

there is an anonymous answer fairly senior official. i think people are gradually leaving government, just an anecdote i mention tom o'connor this fbi agent, he was a police officer in western massachusetts. he joins the fbi, he investigates the u.s. bombing in yemen and he gets the bodies recovered. he's in the pentagon, he and his fellow agents recovered 2000 bags of human remains from the pentagon, so tom o'connor retired recently on 911 he and his wife are both fbi agents. he retired on 911. he fought for these first responders to get more reward is there all getting different cancers he was with jon stewart that day that jon stewart testified before congress. jon stewart was very angry

that day with why congress was not fighting these first responders and these people had been serving and working a government for so long. and so is tom o'connor. he left the fbi and i said so what you gonna do? i said would you ever run for office because you're so angry at congress could you go in and clean things up? and he said no. i would want to do something that has some honor to it or some meaning. that is a really dangerous thing for me to it hear that someone who worked -- i think helps people there are bad fbi there's no question, this guy spent his career investigating , he called evil and all of its forms. and i sensed from him and others a kind of discussed with our political system. i discussed with both sides. i found the cia and the fbi is a violet the rest of the country pray there's a chunk of that love them in the trunk that don't like him.

i just wear these long-term government officials are not great, summer bureaucrats some are lazy, but they are needed. we need a lean, effective government. we see that with the coronavirus that they are just going to get sick of this kalama and the constant attacks and media attacking politicians attack and we just won't have people interested in public service anymore. >> are we seeing that? are we seeing a decrease in applications at the federal lever? >> at the fbi they say they are consistent. during the shutdown, which was about funding for the wall, there is a lot of fbi angry who did not get paid for a think two months it was a longer shut down in u.s. history. they set up food pantries and fbi offices around the country, there are staffers of the fbi coming in in tears asking supervisors for help. some agents were afraid they

couldn't make a credit card payment and then they would fail their credit history. if you fail your credit history you see you are vulnerable to blackmail by foreign power or russian operatives or something. again they were frustrated, some are angry at trunk, some are angry at democrats. that alienation from our democracy, from the democratic process, is really think corrosive and dangerous for this country in the long term. so corrosive and dangerous enough to allow somebody to say these elections are false, i'm not going to abide by them? or were not can have them? >> at this kind back to your media question. therefore consumers or liberals, how do i want to put this, if you are conservative and you are seeing these incredible things on facebook and online, not being reported in the mainstream media, i

would courage people, the wall street journal the news section of the paper, not the opinion section, one thing about newspapers and the new yorker where i work, is that we publish a story, when i publish a story, a lawyer reads it. there are libel laws that allow me to it get sued for defaming someone i'm putting in something that's false for this are for the journal, "new york times", your local papers, many, many outlets. that is not true for twitter, facebook or google. they can put anything on those platforms. they have no responsibility whatsoever for what's online is true or not whether it slanders people if it demeans people, this was written in it was ron white and who put in the language to help the internet grow that gave them an exemption from the libel laws that exist for the rest of the media. again if you are on the left

and you hear something about donald trump and is rests in agents, and it's not in the "new york times", which leans left, it's probably not true. if you are conservative as the wall street journal is probably not true. i would ask people to be skeptical about what you are reading online. you can be as skeptical as you want about the main street media but the scuffle skeptical about what you're reading online. >> i'm looking for the page was somewhere in here you say, you talk about president trump's his lies, and you use the "washington post" as the example of the media that is counting his lies and misstatements. donald trump, look there is the example. that state media is the amazon

"washington post". there is the example of them reporting about things that are a disservice to the country, and not true. i can see why someone would say why should i read a paper the president lies to me every day. an council lies the president tells a rude day, they claim they are lies. >> i'm biased because i'm a journalist. there are hundreds of reporters that cover the lot white house. the washington post fact checker is edited and there's all of these checks into their work. either the president is telling all these lies every day, sort of all of the fact checking organization agree he's making false or exaggerated statements, i believe reporters i believe in journalism i don't get a memo every day telling you what to

write at the new yorker, i was very proud of the stories we did about harvey weinstein we did it carefully because he could've sued us. i believe in journalism we want to get his truth as they can get. they make mistakes, people have personal biases i trust the fact checker i'm biased it established journalists. they have the president made 15000 false or exaggerated claims since he came into office it has increased every year he's been an office. there's hundreds of journalists all being part of a plot to undermine donald trump or as a problem donald trump repeatedly lying and exaggerating? i'm going to believe those journalists i have a bias. i believe in the processes we follow, the fear we have of lawsuits and slander. it's embarrassing if you have to run a correction of your

story that matters to professionally, that's where i stand. people can choose to believe the president over us, my investigation into his claim that there is a deep state that it's carrying out a coup against him, i did not find evidence against that. i had members of the trump administration saying that's an exaggeration, they agree there's not a deep state coup against the president. again, it is a savvy political operator, donald trump, using conspiracy theory this is what he's done and he sent throughout his political career to discredit his component. barack obama using a conspiracy theory to discredit your opponent and any simultaneously, he controls information by blocking congress from getting information that prevents congress from being able to do its job correctly, by calling the media fake news, it discredits us it confuses

people than it limits access to who he's meeting with in the white house. who he is calling, less and less disclosure about those kinds of things. it's very effective, it's a strategy, he knows what he is doing he is a brilliance at messaging. but i come down on the site of most journalists i think the president has a problem in terms of exaggerating facts. and making claims that are exaggerated. >> another question is president trump's complaints about the deep state due to not replacing enough of obama's staff with own people in 2017? >> again at this point, he is been president for three years, he can fire -- he did fire the director of the fbi. all this talk of hillary clinton, the russia uranium deal, all of her ill

legalities that full control of the house and senate they still control the senate, the president has full control of the justice department. he doesn't have control of the government after three years, he should be more effective in placing people to run these departments. to his credit, he sent a tremendous amount of change to the immigration system. he has enacted sweeping environmental changes. he has a lot of power, he has one house from congress, i question, and the first year, yes but he has had plenty of time to clean house at this point. in my view. >> or jim comey and. [inaudible] part of the deep state part of the solution?

>> i don't like the term deep state. so i did not find a deep state. our bob muller and james comey career governor under and government servants? those are more neutral terms. yes. did they work and government, bob muller spent his whole career as a federal prosecutor and fbi director. he did some things are questioned after 911 in terms of surveillance of mosques and other things. i think they fit in the category of career government officials who may be of april washington viewpoints. they were not acting and carrying out plots against president george w. bush or president obama. they operated within the confines of the system that was again created in the 70s.

with a former cia director and he said we didn't like all this oversight and rules, when they came out in the cia but they came to accept them because there was like rules of the road. if you're going to go spy and a foreign country, for going to detain someone and how you interrogate them, there were ways to do it because cia operatives feared what happened after 911. they carried out these enhanced interrogation techniques, torture techniques. a new president was elected. john durham looked at the torture that went on and decided there were not criminal charges to bring because the sitting president at the time said it was legal. they say it is the political class, the lifelong justice department workers a lifelong fbi, cia people.

they claim and nine a people roll their eyes, they are abiding by these rules, they manage congress not saying they do everything but they claim it is the political class that's now exaggerating intelligence or bearing intelligence depending upon what helps them politically. it's the political class alleging these conspiracies. they claim they are not true. it has just become score political points anyway you can and it's a damaging these institutions, it's damaging the public's view of these institutions i'm sorry it's a long answer, these career people, diplomats say the political class -- and the media has got to turn down the temperature and stop the cycle of attacks. >> my salary brought up in the book about shifts and when when he was proceeding with

his charges. he heard the republican representative from texas. he thought sh i ff he didn't think he was fair in his presentation. >> during the trump russia investigation i want to get this right, i think schiff said there is beyond information about the collision. how could robert mueller be part of the deep state and betray donald trump when he basically exonerated donald trump from collision with russia. there was trump trying to interfere with the investigation. i think that is this idea that bob muller is a straight shooter. is tony fauci during the level bestie can with the

information he can and to come to conclusions about coronavirus? neither are perfect, if we think no one -- if we don't have some kind of a political expert, some believe in basic facts whether it's reported or we sent a newspaper, book you read government report, how do we govern? that was the allegation against adam schiff and knew there was not evidence and shift just kept having it in the headlines on tv every night because it was powerful and the last thing about heard he's a character in the book as well he was a cia officer for about a decade, ran for congress, he was a moderate republican, one of the few african-americans in congress when it came to impeachment, he came firmly down, he talks

about and you meet adam schiff and he's getting death threats but he resents the president, thanks he's a tremendous threat to democracy and excess essential threat to the future of the american and republic as we know it. and then you talk about people like will heard, and they say trump is on orthodox commies kind amateur us, that was a term heard used for the call with ukraine's president. he thanks there are many moderate republicans feel democrats are just overreacting to trump, this trump derangement syndrome. it's amazing, it's dangerous the gap the two realities about what is trope represent. >> where you? where are you and the pendulum swing? >> i don't want to go too far. i think it is really important for journalists to not -- i'm knocking to sit here and tell

people they should vote for there's a lot of people trashing the president are saying is great i'm sure people will say, since i say i did not find evidence in the deep state of anti- trump but i'm just trying to present my honest effort and doesn't interviews over an 18 month period that i did not -- again every president is frustrated with democracies yes we have to be on the fbi in the cia, they are very powerful in the digital age it's easier to surveillance ever it's easy to violate the privacy. what i found this the most powerful way to do that is have all three branches of government all over the fbi and the cia, to have the press all over them to force more transparency it's cumbersome, it's chaotic but rather than more secrecy and concentrating power, that's what's let us to abuse in the past.

i found what i found but i'm not going to sit here and read the president's mind or call him nays, enough of that is going on or call adam schiff nays. i think it's important for journalists keep their mouth shut at certain points and talk about the facts so maybe you answered this x essential threat to democracy or the policies that have unfolded and excess essential threat to democracy's back i worry, it appears the appointment of again, on me step back and say i applaud every member, every senator of the senate intelligence committee and the chair, richard burr of north carolina affirmed today, that russia helped donald trump and the election for that's the opposite of the political messaging the president

wants. god bless them for doing that today, i think the appointment of john ratcliffe who's a member of the house to insist that is false there was never any help, the real issue was ukraine was interfering in the election are not russia, that makes me nervous that you're putting, there has to be people in government positions were trying their level best to get basic facts across, to be journalists doing that and you cannot have every single position filled with the political player will twist the facts. again we can't function as a democracy part i will say it again and again coronavirus shows we cannot help each other, survive this pandemic if we can't agree on basic facts. >> here's the last question from a viewer.

have you heard of three felonies a day, the idea is the typical american commits three felonies. day they can be prosecuted and imprisoned for them if the government decided to. the point is criminal law and regulations got so vast that anybody can be got through selective enforcement. any thoughts on that? >> i don't know if that's true but again i think that shows how we need more transparency. i guess i would just say, i would hope we would each get a trial by jury. this goes back to our constitution, it would be wrong if prosecutors could bring you or me to it trial, they have that power, we cannot go to jail unless a jury of our peers, maybe they can take the evidence from the trial, that is possible but that's why we need a divided system where there are not just prosecutors controlled by in executive branch and then there's juries, there's

legislators who want to expose that's happening, there's a press that wants to expose it, lots of divided powers and chaos. hopefully that protects all of us. that was a great question. >> i imagine there are some people have experienced part of the mass incarceration for the last 20 years that would say that's already taken place. >> that is true. i just, it's true. that's one of our biggest problems. it's true. i don't have a good answer to that one. that's really a cultural problem a problem with how does a country through generations. it's inexcusable, versus a plot that was carried out

secretly by government officials if that makes any sense. it's a core structural psychological bigotry that runs up and down throughout americans versus the secret organizations carrying this out without all of us knowing. it is a horrible problem and it continues today. >> we are going to have probably a pretty rambunctious election. and a campaign and election. it may be partially like this, does that concern you in any way, shape, form? she feel there still transparency and access taking place throughout this pandemic? >> i worry -- one of the big changes is the dark money and elections and the changes that happen with the supreme court's citizen in citizens united we don't know what

they're doing the campaign is being waged online i ask people to be more skeptical than what you're reading online or singing a newspaper and website again, you can read to the writer read to the left, try to be skeptical about where your information is coming from. there is a ton of misinformation out there, that is a bad information that spread by people who don't realize it's bad information. this information is intentionally spreading false information to cause it discord and fear. going to be a lot of that. think americans a very savvy, i think they will figure out the election will be a lot of yelling and screaming, i think

it's really healthy for the country that we have an election coming up and we should all accept the results of the election. we have this incredible system or local counties are carrying out the elections across the country. i don't think there is some vast plot to change the results of our elections. i could be wrong. again, we have to believe in some basic facts and truth. vote. yell if you want, not violence, votes in usual voice. no violence. >> alright david believe that as a last word i appreciated. >> thank you. >> thank you david,. >> thank you so much to you and candice. >> thank you folks. >> thank you both so much for coming on tonight and talking to us, journalism is so important, thank you both your work. thank gift to the viewers as well for joining us. if you're interested in upcoming programming, they can follow us by clicking the follow button at the top right corner of your screen. again, please buy the book.

and if you are able, and interested, and more townhall stuff, please donate if you can. thank you so much to both of you again, have a great night everybody. >> here are some of the current best-selling nonfiction books according to indy balance. topping the list is the splendid and the vial. eric larson study of winston churchill's leadership during the london blitz. followed by glenn and doyle's memoir untamed. after that is roberts hidden valley road, profiled the galvin family which consisted of 12 family half of whom were diagnosed with schizophrenia. madame glenn albright's memoir and repping up our look at some of the best-selling nonfiction books according to indy bounds, is care westover's account of growing up in the idaho mountains and her introduction to formal education at the age of 17. her book, educated, has been on bestseller lists for more

than two years. some of these authors have appeared on book tv and you can watch them online @booktv.org. >> ♪ ♪ the president, from public affairs available now in paperback and e-book. presents biographies of every president, organized by the ranking, by noted historians from best to worst. and features perspectives into the lives of our nation's chief executives and leadership styles. visit our website c-span.org/the president to learn more about each president and historian feature. order your copy today. wherever books and e-books are sold. >> during a virtual author program, then bernanke he who had an essential role in the financial crisis talks about the action the fed is taken to

mitigate the economic impact of the code 19 crisis. here is a portion of his talk. >> the fed has been intervening substantially in credit markets. credit markets have been very disrupted by the crisis, by the fact that people are so uncertain about how long it will last, with the casual implications will be. and so is a crisis began, many, many credit markets were disrupted. and the fed, as glenn said his borrowed from the feds playbook from 2008 and added quite a few innovations of its own. borrowing from the 2008 playbook, it's done really three things. first it has created commercial paper short-term lending to corporations to help them finance their inventories and their materials, the working capital. that something we did in

2008. that is on the shelf, it's up, it's already writing. secondly there's a money market liquidity fund that we also had in 2008 they brought up. that allows money markets to sell their securities and reduce the money markets we've seen a run for nama on money market mutual funds this has been helping there as well. and then the third facility we had as they're also planning to reintroduce but not yet, so called help the term back lending facility is used to buy packages of credit, consumer credit, credit cards, student loans and a variety of other types of credit to help make those markets more effective. these announcements, together with the treasury securities already improve credit market functioning significantly.

beyond that the fed is going to use it verging three emergency powers of reason 2008 for the first time since the depression. the fed in general has very limited ability to buy assets and make loans. but under emergency conditions unusual conditions, and with the permission of the treasury secretary the fed can lend to anybody that's a 133 facility and power, based on that they are adding a whole number of lending facilities that will try again to ensure businesses can borrow cheaply effectively in order to maintain their survival to this. so what's coming out, there's two corporate facilities, one lends directly to corporations, essentially

inking loans or buying bonds of corporations to survive the. , there's a secondary facility that will buy existing bonds trying to improve functioning of the credit markets in the corporate bond market. thirdly, this is important difficult one. it's quite substantially from past experience, the fed is also going to introduce a so-called main street business lending program. main street is a little bit of a misnomer because it's really for middle sized firms. 510,000 employees. with the fed will be doing, we don't know the details yet, presumably they'll be asking banks to make loans to these midsized firms and the fed will be providing cheap liquidity and perhaps providing against risks of banks will be incentivized to make loans to these midsized firms prayed the smallest institution, the smallest

businesses are eligible for loans from the sba come the small business administration, that began this week. again logistics are so important there have been some snafus in terms of getting the money out. i hope that will get straightened out. but that is supposed to provide the sba program is supposed to provide cash to smallest businesses on favorable terms in fact is learns or at least partially forgivable at the small companies maintain their payroll. : : :

>>